Beyond the barriers: family medicine residents’ attitudes towards providing Aboriginal health care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: Health care is one of many under-resourced areas in Aboriginal communities in Canada. Aboriginal people have substandard health compared with the general population, yet have less access to health care services. Not only is there a paucity of Aboriginal doctors, but it also appears that few non-Aboriginal doctors are willing or able to work in Aboriginal contexts. OBJECTIVES: This study examines the attitudes of family medicine residents towards providing health care to Aboriginal patients. The goal of this study was to assess the willingness of family medicine residents to work in Aboriginal health care and to elucidate the major factors that inform these attitudes. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of an urban cohort of family medicine residents using a convenience sample. Our survey instrument consisted of a questionnaire comprising a mixture of open-ended and closed questions. RESULTS: Although a majority (52%, n = 27) of the family medicine residents were willing to work in Aboriginal contexts, many felt underprepared to do so (40%, n = 21). Residents who have had some exposure to Aboriginal issues and have had community experiences are more likely to state an intention to work in Aboriginal settings. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study encourage the creation of educational experiences for medical residents that may promote a desire to work in Aboriginal communities.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".